Third Kavanaugh Accuser Comes Forward Before Hearing

go forward as planned tomorrow. This after Schumer has been calling for the hearing to actually be suspended or postponed, saying Republicans need to immediately suspend the proceedings related to Kavanaugh's nomination. That coming from Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer. So joining us now to bring it all together, as Bloomberg Supreme Court reporter Greg Store to sort of help us sort through all of the fast movie. What does this call it? A fire hose of news and information? Yeah,

no kidding, so uh Amy. The latest this morning is that there is a new accuser, represented by lawyer Michael Avanati, has submitted a sworn statement to the committee saying that Brett Kavanaugh in high school took part in efforts to get girls intoxicated so that a number of boys could have sex with them. Uh. These allegations are perhaps the the the worst of any that Brett Kavanaugh has faced. Um.

They are certainly coming in at the last minute. Uh. There were some questions about whether the hearing would go forward, but as you said, Chuck Grassley has said, now it will go forward. Tomorrow has planned and we have the statement that Kavanaugh will give to the Judiciary Committee tomorrow. Um. It has been released. Uh, and in it, Kavanaugh acknowledges some behavior in his teenage years, including uh, drinking to excess,

but he denies the allegations uh sexualsconduct. Yeah. This statement tracks very closely with what he said on Fox News the other night in the interview. Uh. It is mostly focused on the what's supposed to be the subject of the hearing tomorrow. The first set of allegations by professor Christine Blossie Ford about who accuses him and a friend of taking her into her room, and she says that Kavanaugh tried to force himself on her uh and take

off her clothes before she got away. The statement, does though, um, you know, talk about uh, you know, other last minute smears, as Kavanaugh puts it, and says that what's going on is quote grotesque and obvious character assassination. What are you expecting to hear tomorrow when they tested? I mean, I know, just throw a dart, I guess. But what are you

what are you looking for? Well, one of the things that certainly gonna look for, so so Senate Republicans have hired a a sex crimes prosecutor UM, a woman named Rachel Mitchell out of Merricopa County in Arizona. H Uh. She will be asking at least some of the questions that republic during the Republican time. It will be interesting to see whether the Republican all of whom are men, or whether the Republicans are also asking questions of of

Christine Ford and Brett Kavanaugh. Um. And certainly all eyes are gonna be on Christine Ford because we have not heard from her out loud yet, we don't know we had nobody has had a chance to uh, you know, see what she sounds like and judge her credibility, and that uh pretty clearly is going to be very important, important both for public opinion, and those senators who say

they're still unsure how they're going to vote. And we do now have word from a White House a spokesman, a new a new statement from Brett Kavanaugh on this latest accusation, this third one with this sworn statement quote. This is ridiculous and from the twilight zone. I don't know who this is and this never happened. So, Um, Gregg, does Kavanaugh make it through or not? Boy, Peter, I've given up predicting a long time ago. Um. The senators to to watch are are the ones that we've always

been watching. Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, Uh, two women who who support abortion rights and and have suggested they are concerned about these allegations. And then Senator Jeff Flake, who is on the committee. Uh no, big friend of of President Donald Trump. Uh. You know, they have all sort of collectively said we want to hear from these women.

They're only gonna hear from one tomorrow, Christine Ford. It will be interesting to to see whether these new allegations and somebody else who is not going to be heard tomorrow, whether that makes any difference in how those senators think about this. Talking about the Alpha davits, they're talking about other people who can actually speak. We're not going to hear from anybody that right, Kavanaugh and Ford, and that's it correct. At the hearing tomorrow, we will hear from

Kavanaugh and Ford. It's, of course certainly possible that uh, one or more of these women will choose to speak in some other forum. But but in terms of the hearing tomorrow, it's just those two witnesses. Is there an a chance that Republicans could acquiesce and allow the FBI to investigate all of this, Well, you know the Democrats request, I'd hate to say there's no chance. They've been pretty firm on that, um and and they tried it out.

Some video of Joe Biden back during the Clarence Thomas hearing saying that, you know, an FBI investigation is not going to be conclusive in that case, um and Republicans are saying, look, um, you know, FBI investigation is only going to delay this. It's not going to give give us a clear answer to this obviously. Uh. You know, things are changing quickly, but for the time being, it doesn't seem like Republicans are going that direction. All right, Greg,

we got about a half a minute ago. I'm wondering he gets let's say he gets confirmed, he seated on the Supreme Court. Is this a cloud that's gonna hover over the Supreme Court? I mean, what does this do to people's opinion of the court one way or the other? Well, I mean, because it's part Yeah, it's so partisans getting even more partisan. And if he gets confirmed, you're gonna have somebody who, at a minimum a lot of people in the country are gonna alide his way onto the

Supreme Court. Uh. And certainly that will take a while to to dissipate, and that could hurt the credibility of the court. It certainly could. And uh, I'm sure Chief Justice John Robertson in particular is going to be very mindful of that as we get this new conservative majority on the Court. If that's how it turns out, all right,

we're gonna keep watching it with you. Bloomberg Supreme Court reporter Greg Store joining us now in our Bloomberg Downing nine one studios here in Washington, taking three insight appreciate it as JUDG. Brett Kavanaugh and Dr Christine blaisie Ford prepare for a Senate hearing tomorrow. President Trump is lashing out again, saying that the Democrats are playing a dangerous

game during a u N meeting yesterday. It would be a horrible insult to our country if this doesn't happen, and it will be a horrible, horrible thing for future political people. Judges. Anything you want to be a horrible thing, it can not. It cannot be allowed to have. Joining me is Arthur Hellman, a professor at the University of Pittsburgh Law School. Arthur, would it be such a horrible

thing as Trump claims? Isn't the confirmation process supposed to be about making a decision about whether a candidate is qualified to have lifetime tenure on the courts, on the country's highest court. Sure, it's about that, And the question is what sort of processes and what kind of accusations are going to be taken seriously and in what way?

I think the concern that some people have is the timing, the lack of corroboration, and the fact that the regular channels were not pursued by people who had the information process is what's particularly important here. So, but what happens now, what what should be done? Now that the process hasn't been followed, as you say, but now these allegations, including there is a third accuser who's come forward, So what

should the Senate Judiciary Committee do now? I think what the Senate Judiciary Committee has to do is to do preliminary private investigation of accusations and then determine whether those require a further examination, either in public or through additional

private investigation. It's very hard to investigate what happened five years ago, but something, something has to be done so that people have confidence, or as much confidence as people can have these days, that the accusations have been adequately investigated. So so then, from what you're saying, the committee hearing, where it's just going to be Judge Kavanaugh and Dr Ford will not be able to accomplish that. I don't

think so at this point. I think yesterday it appeared that it would, but this may be the first of several such hearings, although as I say, that would depend on what the private investigations by private, I mean not part of the public hearing um would would reveal. I

just want to tell you about some breaking news. President Trump has tweeted about Michael Abanati and his clients saying that, um, he's looking for attention and doesn't want people to look at his past record and relationships, and he's a third rate lawyer. That's about the latest accusations from Avanati from his client on Brett Kavanaugh. Arthur, you teach judicial ethics. What's your take on Kavanaugh's unprecedented TV interview? Is that

in keeping with the image of the justices? Well, it's certainly not the first TV interview that UM A well, UH sitting justices have done TV interviews. UM. Justice Ginsburg recently has done several. There was actually one many many years ago now with Justice Black talking about his judicial philosophy. For the fact of a TV interview by a judge is not unique. It's unusual, certainly for a judge who was a nominee to the Supreme Court to do that.

And I don't recall any off hand by nominees. But there have not been this kind of last minute accusation. So we're entirely in uncharted waters here. I want to go beyond the hearings for a moment. If Kavanaugh is confirmed and Democrats retake the House, some Democrats have said they will start impeachment proceedings against him based on some of his sworn testimony to the committee. It has been done before, and the political climate with a conservative majority

on the court would be heated. What would be the result of those well, the first attempts to impeach a sitting Supreme Court justice was in the very early days of the Republic. It was just a Samuel Chase, and then, as now, there was a bitter partisan divide that Chase was a Federalist and the UM Congress had been taken over by the UM that Democratic party of that year

at Jefferson's party. So in some respect it was a very parallel kind of situation, a change in who controlled Congress and the presidency and an impeachment effort directed at a sitting justice appointed by the prior president. But it was so clear that they were trying to impeach him and remove him from office that that effort failed, and that has been taken ever since as a signal that UM, no matter what the circumstances are, you don't try to

impeach a justice because of his views on legal issues. Now, of course, this is not what would we be ostensibly facing here. The argument would not be that we should impeach him because he's a conservative. The argument would be, we should impeach him. I take it because we believe he committed perjury during the process of confirmation to the

Supreme Court, So that would be something different. But it would certainly seem too many people to be a kind of payback, just as the impeachment of Justice Chase was seen and has been seen historically as a form of payback. So now, if Kavanaugh is not confirmed, can he just go back to his old job as judge on the d C Circuit Court of Appeals when a judicial complaint has been filed against him related to his allegedly perjured

testimony to Congress. Well, those are two separate issues. Certainly he can, and I assume would go back to his would resume decide in cases. And if you look at some of the other failed nominations, Judge Ginsberg, the other judge Ginsberg went back to his job. The closest parallel

actually is back to the Nixon era. Nixon nominated a judge named Clement Hainsworth who was voted down based on ethical allegations or allegations of ethical wrongdoing, which, by the way, a number of people later admitted I was they probably did not um treat him right. But he went back served as a judge of the Fourth Circuit with great distinction for many, many years after that. Now, the separate question is what happens when a misconduct complaint is filed?

And I gather one has been and Congress has established a pretty elaborate process for handling complaints of misconduct or disability by federal judges, and the first step is a review by the chief Judge of the Circuit, which happens to be Merrill Garland. Now, in this particular instance, I believe that Judge Garland will use a procedure that is provided for the new rules. He will ask Chief Justice Roberts to transfer this misconduct proceeding to another circuit. All right,

thank you, Thank you so much, Arthur. We will of course be looking forward to what's happening tomorrow and talk to you again. That's Arthur Hellman, a professor at the University of Pittsburgh Law School. Thanks for listening to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can subscribe and listen to the show on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcast. I'm June Brasso. This is Bloomberg. Check the dependent duck of the